Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

It's probably only a very small part of arch users that uses --force (without being told to), but most of them are now on the forums because they nuked their system. Luckily people learn from their mistakes . If we had an upgrade like that every week, no-one would use force unless they were told to.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Zancarius wrote:

I suppose no one reads man pages anymore ...

Perhaps this should be in the "I know I'm a nerd because ..." thread, but I spend a good bit of my free time reading man pages and doxygen documentation ... even for tools I don't have any current use of. You never know when a use will pop up, and unless you know what is out there, you wont be able to come up with good solutions.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Trilby wrote:

Zancarius wrote:

I suppose no one reads man pages anymore ...

Perhaps this should be in the "I know I'm a nerd because ..." thread, but I spend a good bit of my free time reading man pages and doxygen documentation ... even for tools I don't have any current use of. You never know when a use will pop up, and unless you know what is out there, you wont be able to come up with good solutions.

I spent most of last autumn reading the manuals to all the GNU stuff: coreutils, bash, gawk, and so on. It was great. I wouldn't be surprised if there are many people around here who like reading technical manuals.Anyway, I had a ton of "lightbulb floating over my head" moments when I went on that manual binge. I'm in need of some new things to read, in fact.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Let's ask a fundamental question : when a project lays down philosophical foundations to generate 'expert' users, does the project itself benefit from such 'experienced' user community or is it so, that it actually slows down its initial thrust ?

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

holytrousers wrote:

Let's ask a fundamental question : when a project lays down philosophical foundations to generate 'expert' users, does the project itself benefit from such 'experienced' user community or is it so, that it actually slows down its initial thrust ?

The expectation is for "competent", not expert, users; which suggests a somewhat lower bar. It is also more accomodating of those who may not yet have acquired extensive knowledge, but are prepared toassume responsibility for their machines and do the work that that entails.

I don't think it slows down the community. The devs follow upstream and make the necessary technical decisions and everyone else is free to upgrade (or not).

The disappointing aspect of some of the activity here, and on IRC and the ML, is the sense of entitlement that some users seem to have regarding running Arch. Managing to install and run Arch does not,irrespective of how long you have been running it for, give you the right to disparage the efforts of those that do the actual work.

Change is difficult for all of us. However, choosing to run a rolling release and then whining when it changes is more likely evidence of diminished sense of perspective than anything else. As for the indiscriminateuse of --force, I think it is more likely the result of a desire for instantaneous gratification; a lot of people seem to be in a hurry to install Arch, the same ones are no doubt just as frantic about resolving issues, whichdoesn't lead to the best decision making or outcomes for them...

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

jasonwryan wrote:

The expectation is for "competent", not expert, users; which suggests a somewhat lower bar. It is also more accomodating of those who may not yet have acquired extensive knowledge, but are prepared toassume responsibility for their machines and do the work that that entails.

if i may ask : what is the difference between a competence, and expertise ?aren't both the result of the same thing : knowledge ?when it comes to assuming responsibility for one's machine : when one doesn't know what to do, one asks for help. when one already has the necessary knowledge, then one just does the work.i guess that what you are trying to say, and correct me if i'm wrong, is that the 'expectation' is to generate curiosity and passion, as well as a high level of intimacy with the operating system ?

I don't think it slows down the community. The devs follow upstream and make the necessary technical decisions and everyone else is free to upgrade (or not).

The disappointing aspect of some of the activity here, and on IRC and the ML, is the sense of entitlement that some users seem to have regarding running Arch. Managing to install and run Arch does not,irrespective of how long you have been running it for, give you the right to disparage the efforts of those that do the actual work.

here one must consider the project as a whole and one can't put emphasis on a part of the project over the other (developers over users, software over documentation etc. )so let's consider arch at it's birth, the thrust it had considering it's limited and 'passionate' user base, the freshness of it's ideas etc.and let's compare that to the actual state of the project.one must be totally honest about it, with this 'expert' or 'competent' user base which spawned, how capable is the project to evolve (i.e. proportionally to the initial settings) bringing new features, ideas, optimizations, understanding etc. ?

Change is difficult for all of us. However, choosing to run a rolling release and then whining when it changes is more likely evidence of diminished sense of perspective than anything else. As for the indiscriminateuse of --force, I think it is more likely the result of a desire for instantaneous gratification; a lot of people seem to be in a hurry to install Arch, the same ones are no doubt just as frantic about resolving issues, whichdoesn't lead to the best decision making or outcomes for them...

from various post i've read on this and other forums, it strikes me that knowledge inflates so much the ego. It doesn't bring wisdom at all, and instead of examining what has to be examined, indulging in fatalist discourses occurs.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

A "troll" is a person who intentionally attempts to disrupt, cause controversy, incite an argument, and/or receive negative attention by deliberately posting provocative content. The term may also refer to the act of posting such content, or the content itself.Trolls are generally deceitful and often use ambivalence as a method of covertly insulting, intimidating, or inciting a person or persons for their own sadistic pleasure. They often pick their words very carefully and are therefore able to defend their masked attempts at creating unrest, frequently redirecting the blame onto the community and its supposed failure to understand them properly. Trolling is strictly prohibited.

Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael FaradaySometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing---How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

if you consider that being critical is trolling, and trying to inquire more into the projects weak points to better understand them is prohibited, forgive me for replying to your post.PS. I didn't expect users, and certainly not moderators, on such a forum, to take things personally.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

holytrousers wrote:

jasonwryan wrote:

The expectation is for "competent", not expert, users; which suggests a somewhat lower bar. It is also more accomodating of those who may not yet have acquired extensive knowledge, but are prepared toassume responsibility for their machines and do the work that that entails.

if i may ask : what is the difference between a competence, and expertise ?aren't both the result of the same thing : knowledge ?

They differ in degree: competence is a step towards expert. Note, "expert" was your original term, it is different to "expertise".

holytrousers wrote:

when it comes to assuming responsibility for one's machine : when one doesn't know what to do, one asks for help. when one already has the necessary knowledge, then one just does the work.i guess that what you are trying to say, and correct me if i'm wrong, is that the 'expectation' is to generate curiosity and passion, as well as a high level of intimacy with the operating system ?

jasonwryan wrote:

I don't think it slows down the community. The devs follow upstream and make the necessary technical decisions and everyone else is free to upgrade (or not).

The disappointing aspect of some of the activity here, and on IRC and the ML, is the sense of entitlement that some users seem to have regarding running Arch. Managing to install and run Arch does not,irrespective of how long you have been running it for, give you the right to disparage the efforts of those that do the actual work.

here one must consider the project as a whole and one can't put emphasis on a part of the project over the other (developers over users, software over documentation etc. )so let's consider arch at it's birth, the thrust it had considering it's limited and 'passionate' user base, the freshness of it's ideas etc.and let's compare that to the actual state of the project.one must be totally honest about it, with this 'expert' or 'competent' user base which spawned, how capable is the project to evolve (i.e. proportionally to the initial settings) bringing new features, ideas, optimizations, understanding etc. ?

I think the project is very healthy. Look at the volume and frequency of packages. Look at the adaption to change upstream. Look at the calibre of the newer developers and TUs. For a GNU/Linux project, it seems that Arch is succeeding in the niche that it has carved out for itself.

holytrousers wrote:

jasonwryan wrote:

Change is difficult for all of us. However, choosing to run a rolling release and then whining when it changes is more likely evidence of diminished sense of perspective than anything else. As for the indiscriminateuse of --force, I think it is more likely the result of a desire for instantaneous gratification; a lot of people seem to be in a hurry to install Arch, the same ones are no doubt just as frantic about resolving issues, whichdoesn't lead to the best decision making or outcomes for them...

from various post i've read on this and other forums, it strikes me that knowledge inflates so much the ego. It doesn't bring wisdom at all, and instead of examining what has to be examined, indulging in fatalist discourses occurs.

waiting forward to hearing from you soon.

cheers !

I think that you are mistaking the pragmatic approach of the community, where handholding is eschewed, for arrogance or elitism. It is a charge that is often levelled and my experience is that it is baseless and proven so by the volume and quality of the contributions that the community make to the distro and to supporting others to use it.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

jasonwryan wrote:

holytrousers wrote:

jasonwryan wrote:

The expectation is for "competent", not expert, users; which suggests a somewhat lower bar. It is also more accomodating of those who may not yet have acquired extensive knowledge, but are prepared toassume responsibility for their machines and do the work that that entails.

if i may ask : what is the difference between a competence, and expertise ?aren't both the result of the same thing : knowledge ?

They differ in degree: competence is a step towards expert. Note, "expert" was your original term, it is different to "expertise".

yes, and 'expert' itself was quoted from previous posts found here and there.but let me ask the question again, because it seems we are turning around the same spot :if the distribution's philosophy is generating an increasing level of knowledge among it's users, is it beneficial to the project itself ?analogous to that is a question to a pedagogue, if you are gonna fill kids with ever increasing amounts of information, are you gonna make a better society ?i'm asking the question to fundamentally and radically bring a change to how we perceive what's going on.because problems do exist, nothing is perfect, and scraping your hand won't make the mosquitoes go away.

holytrousers wrote:

when it comes to assuming responsibility for one's machine : when one doesn't know what to do, one asks for help. when one already has the necessary knowledge, then one just does the work.i guess that what you are trying to say, and correct me if i'm wrong, is that the 'expectation' is to generate curiosity and passion, as well as a high level of intimacy with the operating system ?

jasonwryan wrote:

I don't think it slows down the community. The devs follow upstream and make the necessary technical decisions and everyone else is free to upgrade (or not).

The disappointing aspect of some of the activity here, and on IRC and the ML, is the sense of entitlement that some users seem to have regarding running Arch. Managing to install and run Arch does not,irrespective of how long you have been running it for, give you the right to disparage the efforts of those that do the actual work.

here one must consider the project as a whole and one can't put emphasis on a part of the project over the other (developers over users, software over documentation etc. )so let's consider arch at it's birth, the thrust it had considering it's limited and 'passionate' user base, the freshness of it's ideas etc.and let's compare that to the actual state of the project.one must be totally honest about it, with this 'expert' or 'competent' user base which spawned, how capable is the project to evolve (i.e. proportionally to the initial settings) bringing new features, ideas, optimizations, understanding etc. ?

I think the project is very healthy. Look at the volume and frequency of packages. Look at the adaption to change upstream. Look at the calibre of the newer developers and TUs. For a GNU/Linux project, it seems that Arch is succeeding in the niche that it has carved out for itself.

indeed.but satisfaction is death of desire.

holytrousers wrote:

jasonwryan wrote:

Change is difficult for all of us. However, choosing to run a rolling release and then whining when it changes is more likely evidence of diminished sense of perspective than anything else. As for the indiscriminateuse of --force, I think it is more likely the result of a desire for instantaneous gratification; a lot of people seem to be in a hurry to install Arch, the same ones are no doubt just as frantic about resolving issues, whichdoesn't lead to the best decision making or outcomes for them...

from various post i've read on this and other forums, it strikes me that knowledge inflates so much the ego. It doesn't bring wisdom at all, and instead of examining what has to be examined, indulging in fatalist discourses occurs.

waiting forward to hearing from you soon.

cheers !

I think that you are mistaking the pragmatic approach of the community, where handholding is eschewed, for arrogance or elitism. It is a charge that is often levelled and my experience is that it is baseless and proven so by the volume and quality of the contributions that the community make to the distro and to supporting others to use it.

aren't you contradicting yourself ?talking about how users are lame, or stupid, or lazy won't solve the problem, is what i'm trying to say, as well as the fact that ego is inflated when one acquires knowledge, which is basically what ... but i guess my interventions are pointless, maybe its not the right thread to talk about it.sorry for any inconvenience.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

You know I don't think using either Ubuntu or Windows will prevent you from rming your system.

[zen]A tool that is idiot-proof is a tool without purpose.[/zen]

<nit-pick> s/purpose/function/ </nit-pick>

Terminator wrote:

It's probably only a very small part of arch users that uses --force (without being told to), but most of them are now on the forums because they nuked their system. Luckily people learn from their mistakes . If we had an upgrade like that every week, no-one would use force unless they were told to.

Do they really? From having to read the last few weeks of forum and ML posts, I'd argue that at least some subset of the 'people' set not only do not learn from their mistakes but see their mistakes as being the fault of others...

holytrousers wrote:

if you consider that being critical is trolling, and trying to inquire more into the projects weak points to better understand them is prohibited, forgive me for replying to your post.PS. I didn't expect users, and certainly not moderators, on such a forum, to take things personally.

You are dragging the topic off on a useless tangent, and that is trolling. Moderators are here to enforce the forum etiquette (which you've of course read, as a responsible member of the forum), and being called out on violating that doesn't mean they've taken anything personally.

Besides, your points are invalid for various reasons, which I'd be happy to discuss with you either in an off-topic thread or by email. Certainly NOT in this thread.

Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

jakobcreutzfeldt wrote:

Trilby wrote:

Zancarius wrote:

I suppose no one reads man pages anymore ...

Perhaps this should be in the "I know I'm a nerd because ..." thread, but I spend a good bit of my free time reading man pages and doxygen documentation ... even for tools I don't have any current use of. You never know when a use will pop up, and unless you know what is out there, you wont be able to come up with good solutions.

I spent most of last autumn reading the manuals to all the GNU stuff: coreutils, bash, gawk, and so on. It was great. I wouldn't be surprised if there are many people around here who like reading technical manuals.Anyway, I had a ton of "lightbulb floating over my head" moments when I went on that manual binge. I'm in need of some new things to read, in fact.

Although I'm quoting you, this should be directed to both you and Trilby.

I certainly don't think you're alone. I don't do a lot of recreational reading these days, but I think most of that has been supplanted by other things. The occasional man page or technical document can make for a surprisingly interesting read, and I've caught myself with my nose in a few--not with any purpose in mind, of course, but it's amazing what can gleaned from accidental discoveries. Though, I think it's important to note that while a large number of us probably do this more often than we'd care to admit, I also think that there's something of a selection bias.

I also admit to spending far more time on Wikipedia than is probably healthy whenever I'm not reading something else. My recent obsession has taken a turn toward Cold War era aircraft for reasons that will probably remain a mystery to me.

I'd also be willing to bet that there's a large number of similarities among all of us here which probably explains why we share similar reactions to the amount of --force'ing that has been unearthed by the recent /lib change. Alas, while you can't force someone to read the documentation, I suppose the next best thing is to harp on about it.

Edit:

ngoonee wrote:

From having to read the last few weeks of forum and ML posts, I'd argue that at least some subset of the 'people' set not only do not learn from their mistakes but see their mistakes as being the fault of others...

Having worked technical support in another life, this is more true than you might care to know...

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

If I have learned anything from updating with pacman -Syu for over a year it is: "When pacman says there is a conflict there probably is already an announcement on archlinux.org about it on how to deal with it."

Why have a --force flag in pacman in the first place? Are there situations where it is really the only option? Maybe it works in some cases even though you could have solved it with a little bit of extra work so lazy people will simply --force. Next time the same thing but Arch won't be so forgiving.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Whenever I want to try something I'm not 100% sure of, I always do it in virtualbox first. That goes for nearly all uses of --force. It's a really nice strategy for trying things you're unsure of; I'm surprised more people don't reccomend doing it.

Now that I think about it, I practiced using Arch in virtualbox for quite a while before I installed it on my physical disk. Made the transition really smooth.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Meh, i'll toss in a vote against the removal of -f. Then again, i can understand the philosophy.

I used the --force when trying to upgrade glibc (actually, i did it twice on two systems. I'm slow on the uptake.). But you know what? i learned a shat-ton about how DLL's function. I value a distribution that allows mistakes to be made, and that encourages learning from such cockups.

Re: What's with all the --force-ing?

Usagi, you are echoing a common *nix philosophy which I'm not bothering to lookup but will only paraphrase: don't restrict users' ability to do something stupid, or else you'll also restrict there ability to do something creative.

However, in this case, I doubt anything creative can come from the -f flag. No creation, only destruction.